Comments about ‘Letters: Is it unreasonable to want the Constitution protected?’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 17 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Conservatives view the Constitution as a divinely inspired document"

Maybe those in Utah. Mostly it is the LDS belief, both conservative and liberal.
The rest of us just believe it is a great document that has stood the test of time and is the cornerstone to this great nation.

And, I am quite certain that if you really wanted to dig into it, you would find that "conservatives" trample the document just like the "liberals".

Darrel
Eagle Mountain, UT

"Conservatives view the Constitution as a divinely inspired document — the principles of which have made this country the envy of the rest of the world. Liberals view this same document as outdated..."

================

Fight misconception with misconception. The irony...

It maybe better said that we simply have different interpretations of the same document. No one, except a few fringe on either side is really trying to do away with the Constitution. Recognize that and we maybe able to have an actual adult discussion.

ECR
Burke, VA

This letter is just another of the standard postings claiming conservatives are the guardians of our rights protected by the Constitution. That narrow view of the world is what has caused most of the division we experience in the country today. I'm always amused by those who claim to know the intentions of the Founding Fathers and then make sure their interpretation is in complete compliance with their own narrow views. The opinions and ideas of the Founding Fathers were more diverse than anything we see in today's political arena. The greatest attribute of the Founding Fathers was their recognition of their differences and then putting in place a Constitution and a legislative process that could address those differences as the country grew and developed. Neither liberals or conservatives have a lock on truth, justice and the American way. Both sides have a right to have their voices heard and then let the political process determine the direction of the country.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

It only matters when another's interpretation is different than yours. Only your interpretation is correct.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

I too am deeply concerned. I am concerned that too many of us believe our understanding of the constitution is the only understanding. That conservatives and liberals do not actually have quite a bit of common ground on the constitution and that both view it as a powerful protector of sacred rights.

I am deeply concerned that too few of us consider that those who oppose us politically may love our country and its constitution just as well as do we.

Is it extreme to demand that the federal government put its financial house in order? No.

Is it extreme to require that our elected officials take seriously their oaths to uphold, and to preserve and to defend and to protect this same Constitution? No.

But, is it extreme to assume all who do not agree with us are extreme? Yes.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

So Ben if the constitution was divinely inspiried why don't we have Sharia law..after all Allah is God.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Ben,
Even those who crafted and ratified the Constitution didn't always agree on its interpretation, and the debate continues today. The U.S. Constitution is one of the shortest in the world, really, a framework, which leaves much to interpretation.

What is extreme is the Republican Party playing games with the U.S. credit rating--telling the world they will not pay the bills they themselves approved. There are too many uninformed, misinformed Republicans that just don't don't have a clue. Concerned about the debt? Why do they keep voting for the continuing resolutions to keep funding it?

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

Funny. Rick Scott down there in Florida thought he had it all figured out passing a bill allowing prayer in schools.

Satanists “from all over Florida” will gather at the State Capitol on Jan. 25 at 1 p.m. to applaud Scott’s backing of SB 98, according to a news release by a group called The Satanic Temple.

Reconsidering the separation of church and state?

merich39
Salt Lake City, UT

For the most part, the constitution is vaguely worded. Judges, legal scholars and others have been disagreeing about the precise meanings of different passages and amendments since its inception. Often, the separate writings of the framers are cited as evidence of the intent of the vaguely worded constitution. And often those separate writings, even amongst one individual, can be contradictory.

So the real reason that some conservatives are labeled as extreme is in their penchant for always interpreting every passage of the constitution in the most conservative way possible and then asserting that they have absolute insight into the intent of the framers to know without doubt that their ultra conservative interpretation is in agreement with the framers original intent. It's that smug certainty and unwillingness to see any other perspective that begets the label of extreme.

isrred
South Jordan, UT

"Is it extreme to demand that the federal government put its financial house in order?

Is it extreme to require that our elected officials take seriously their oaths to uphold, and to preserve and to defend and to protect this same Constitution?"

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.--The Divinely Inspired Constitution You love so much

The Constitution says NOTHING about "putting our financial house in order" and nothing about Republicans holding the economy hostage threatening to default on our spending obligations.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

There are calls to replace the Constitution, throw it away and start over. They calls come from the left.

Yes there are issues where left and right simply disagree on the interpretation of the Constitution. But when it doesn't serve their needs, the liberals are the ones that talk of replacing the Constitution.

The Constitution is a great document and basis for government. It has governed the greatest country on earth for 226 years.

We are slipping from the top, but it is the Constitution that pulls us back. It is our unwillingness to adhere to it, by immoral and unethical behavior, that is bringing us down.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Part of the genius of the Constitution is that it provided for both "conservative" and "liberal" interpretation. It allows citizens to have and to express differing opinions.

To actually protect the Constitution REQUIRES both viewpoints.

Thus, just as a conservative is acting to protect the Constitution, so is one whose thinking tends to be more liberal.

That is exactly the way the men who wrote it intended it to be. And so, too, perhaps did God.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"There are calls to replace the Constitution, throw it away and start over. They calls come from the left. "

Care to back up that statement with facts? Can you show some credible liberals who are "calling to replace the constitution"?

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The question “Is it extreme to demand that the federal government put its financial house in order”, is like asking “Is it extreme to like Apple Pie”. We would like the government to operate efficiently but most of all we want the government to do it’s job.

The disagreement that we have is in the nature of the job. Is it to enable people to rise up from their animal instincts or is it to cater to those animal instincts and block the enhancement of human beings.

Liberals, like me, believe that the purpose of government is to govern. Or in other words control, regulate, equalize, and otherwise provide for the enhancement of human beings. It is the governing, controlling, regulating, and providing equal opportunity that secures the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Conservatives seem to want to limit, hamstring, emasculate and starve our national government so that they can follow their natural animal instincts of greed, oppression and self enhancement without hindrance or interference from others.

The truth of today is that the Constitution as written 250 years ago needs to be updated to the realities of today.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

Irony of the Day --

"Conservatives view the Constitution as a divinely inspired document —
Liberals view this same document as outdated and as an obstruction to their more enlightened and progressive agenda."

===============

Talk about trampling the Constitution --

Would someone PLEASE explain why then Conservatives have tried to AMMEND and CHANGE the divinely inspired Constitution by a factor of neraly 14 to 1 over Liberals?

The "Christian" ammendment [America is a Christiona nation.]
Anti-Miscegenation Amendment [barring inter-racial marriages]
Flag Desecration Amendment Amendment.
School Prayer Amendment
Federal Marriage Amendment
Equal Opportunity to Govern Amendment [the Arnold Swartzneggar for Presisdent sponsored by our own Orrin Hatch]
Personhood ammendment.
Balanced budget ammendment [again, Orrin Hatch].

I could go on and on....

So, tell me, did God mess it up? Is that why Conservatives need to constantly change and revise it?
Did God go about changing the Bible everytime Conservatives didn't win at the ballot box?

For the record --
Democrats did proposed the "People's Rights Amendment" in 2011,
a proposal to limit the Constitution's protections only to natural persons, and not corporations.

I'd support that one.

Get over yourselves.
Conservatives are the WORST at keeping, protecting and Defending the Constitution - AS IS.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

"There are calls to replace the Constitution, throw it away and start over. They calls come from the left."

Where? An accusation like that requires substantiation.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

"Conservatives view the Constitution as a divinely inspired document — the principles of which have made this country the envy of the rest of the world. Liberals view this same document as outdated and as an obstruction to their more enlightened and progressive agenda."
______________________________

If Mr. Booth doesn't understand the difference between a conservative and a far right extremist, then I'm not surprised at his understanding of what a liberal stands for.

DougS
Oakley, UT

"Separation of church and state" Does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. False interpretations have made it a mantra for the ACLU et al. According to their interpretation, we should destroy and re-build the Supreme Court building because it displays the 10 Commandments. We should permit religious use of human sacrifice/animal sacrifice or other defiant acts to prove that the government does not interfere with any religious practice.
Where in the Constitution does it permit "warrantless searches"? Yet they are done..There are other interpretations of the document that are made to facilitate rules and refulations that anyone with "common sense" could not justify. The term "letter of the law" should also apply to the major law of the land, the U.S. Constitution.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

Mostly I hear the cry for replacing the Constitution from those who are frustrated by the second amendment, and some others who don't like the fact that congress won't rubber stamp for the president since 2010.

But there are more organized efforts too. Try Lawrence Lessig, Ezra Klein (a Washington Post/MSNBC guy), Sanford Levinson. I presume you are capable of googling more for yourself. They are out there.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

Christian 24-7, desiring to amend the Constitution is a far cry from "throwing it away and starting over" as you put it. The process to do so is in place, is available to the Left or the Right, and uses a democratic vote. If someone wants to use it to eliminate the Second Amendment or compel Congress to obey the President, they can knock themselves out trying.

A short internet excursion ties a couple of the names you throw out to a fringe movement for another Constitutional Convention. A wiki synopsis states that members of both the Right and Left are behind it (albeit for different reasons).

It doesn't seem remotely close of a threat to the Constitution as the neo-secessionist movement or screaming for another Revolution of 1776 that have grabbed the headlines from the Right over the past couple of months.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments